On 02.07.2025 16:41, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> x86 is the only architecture wanting an optimisation here, but the
> test_and_set_bit() is a store into the monitored line

Which is intentional aiui, while this reads as if this was part of the issue.

> and is racy with determining whether an IPI can be skipped.

Racy here as in limiting the effect of the optimization, but not affecting
correctness aiui: If the woken CPU managed to clear the bit already, we'd
needlessly IPI it. This could also do with saying.

Jan

Reply via email to